ArticleJACC. Asia2026
Effect of Proton Pump Inhibitors in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Aspirin-Free Strategy.
Article in JACC. Asia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clopidogrel vs. Aspirin in Double Antithrombotic Therapy for Patients on Oral Anticoagulation Undergoing Coronary Stenting.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Article
- Revisiting the Proton Pump Inhibitor-Clopidogrel Conundrum: Do PPIs Truly Worsen Cardiovascular Outcomes?JACC. Asia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSafety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with aspirin-free P2Y
objectivesThe authors aimed to evaluate effects of PPIs in patients undergoing PCI with P2Y
methodsWe compared outcomes between patients with and without PPI prescription in the STOPDAPT-3 trial enrolling patients undergoing PCI stratified by the no-aspirin (1-month prasugrel monotherapy followed by clopidogrel monotherapy: n = 2,909 [acute coronary syndrome: n = 2,170, high bleeding risk: n = 1,580]) and the aspirin (1-month dual antiplatelet therapy followed by aspirin monotherapy: n = 2,914 [acute coronary syndrome: n = 2,171, high bleeding risk: n = 1,566]) strategies at 1 year.
resultsPPIs were prescribed in 2,418 patients (83.1%) with the no-aspirin strategy, and in 2,695 patients (92.5%) with the aspirin strategy. In the propensity score matched cohort (no-aspirin strategy: n = 902 and aspirin strategy: n = 376), a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or stroke more often occurred in the PPI group than in the no-PPI group with the no-aspirin strategy (7.1% vs 2.4%, P = 0.002), but not with the aspirin strategy (6.9% vs 7.4%, P = 0.817). Death also more often occurred in the PPI group than in the no-PPI group with the no-aspirin strategy, but not with the aspirin strategy. Incidence of major bleeding was not different between the groups regardless of the no-aspirin and aspirin strategies (5.5% vs 3.3%, P = 0.150, and 6.9% vs 4.3%, P = 0.278)
conclusionsPPI use was associated with higher risks of cardiovascular events and mortality without decreasing major bleeding in patients undergoing PCI with aspirin-free P2Y
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.